NATION

PASSWORD

[Submitted] Sweet, Sweet Marketing

A place to spoil daily issues for those who haven't had them yet, snigger at typos, and discuss ideas for new ones.
User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

[Submitted] Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Postby Lelscrep » Sun Jan 05, 2020 6:43 am

Draft 9

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of attention-grabbing packaging on sugary foods.

Option One - "How are we supposed to keep our children healthy when all of their favorite cartoon characters are shown brazenly endorsing these products?" screams an angry mother, holding a sign saying "Eyepop ate spinach, not Jupiter Bars!". "Our children - who can't tell reality from fiction yet - are tricked into thinking they need these products to be like their heroes! We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!"

Effect - cereal aisles resemble a Piet Mondrian work

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@. "You people are all over-analyzing this - they're just some silly cartoon characters on some candy packaging, no harm to anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to purchase from us- uh, I mean purchase responsibly."

Effect - candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights

Option Three - "I think the fact that this is an issue in the first place speaks volumes about the way we see obese people!" cries your Minister of Compassion. "Why can't we allow people to be whatever shape they are - well upholstered or small, without the ostracization ever so clearly on display here? We should be focused on loving and supporting everyone, so that everyone feels like a valid human and a legitimate part of our society!"

Effect - weighing scales are thought of similarly to the guillotine
Draft 8

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How are we supposed to keep our children healthy when all of their favorite cartoon characters are shown brazenly endorsing these products?" screams an angry mother, holding a sign saying "Eyepop ate spinach, not Jupiter Bars!". "Our children - who can't tell reality from fiction yet - are tricked into thinking they need these products to be like their heroes! We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!"

Effect - cereal isles resemble a Piet Mondrian work

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@. "You people are all over-analyzing this - they're just some silly cartoon characters on some candy packaging, no harm to anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to purchase from us- uh, I mean purchase responsibly."

Effect - candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights

Option Three - "I mean, that loud mother definitely has a point, but I think she needs to calm down. How about yelling instead of screaming?" your Minister of Compromise butts in, combing half of his hair back. "How about we make it so half of all packaging has to be plain and informative, and the other can have whatever the business wants to put on it? Split directly down the middle! Both sides get literally half of what they want! Isn't that sweet?"

Effect - children are taught to read fine-print while learning about addition
Draft 7

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How are we supposed to keep our children healthy when all of their favorite cartoon characters are shown brazenly endorsing these products!?", screams an angry mother, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Cereal isles resemble a Piet Mondrian work.

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.

Option Three - "I mean, that loud mother definitely has a point, but I think she needs to calm down. How about yelling instead of screaming?" your Minister of Compromise butts in, combing half of his hair back, "The solution is simple: small, informative stickers on all these products so everyone knows what's up with them; they don't even have to change what's on the packaging. Doesn't that sound sweet?"

Effect - Children are taught to read fine-print while learning about addition.
Last edited by Lelscrep on Mon Feb 10, 2020 5:38 pm, edited 27 times in total.

User avatar
Trotterdam
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9229
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:35 am


User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:20 pm

Trotterdam wrote:#811.

Bah I vaguely remembered that issue, assumed the individual outcomes were different enough. Better luck next time then haha

I could try and rework this issue from a sugar one to a marketing one. Like for example the mother's issue is that the packaging is too colorful and obviously meant to get children's attention. Could remove the fourth option if I were to do this rework.
Last edited by Lelscrep on Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:40 pm

Draft 2 complete.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21894
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Australian rePublic » Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:28 pm

How much sugar are we talking about? Are we talking about crazy USA levels of, ridiculous with sugar in bread, meat etc.?
If you're against political parties who support the CCP, then vote against the Australian Labor Party
New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Aardern is so deeply in love with human rights and Muslim lives that she's actively going out of her way to refuse to acknowledge China's persecution of Uyghurs. It's impossible to love human rights & Muslim lives more than that!
Until if and when the Spanish language evolves to allow for gender-neutrality to not be impossible, (which will take at least centuries), the concept of "LatinX" is completely ridiculous
From Greek Ansestry Orthodox Christian
18 Published Issues and 1 WA Resolution List of NPC Nations
In-Character posts made by this fictious account do not reflect the actions of any real world government

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Mon Jan 06, 2020 3:20 am

Australian rePublic wrote:How much sugar are we talking about? Are we talking about crazy USA levels of, ridiculous with sugar in bread, meat etc.?

Following recent legislation, sugar is now the most prominent ingredient by weight in bread or something haha

Issue has been changed to not focus on sugar content but rather the marketing and packaging, to differentiate its content from the issue mentioned above.

User avatar
Candlewhisper Archive
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 22361
Founded: Aug 28, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Candlewhisper Archive » Mon Jan 06, 2020 3:34 am

Lelscrep wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:How much sugar are we talking about? Are we talking about crazy USA levels of, ridiculous with sugar in bread, meat etc.?

Following recent legislation, sugar is now the most prominent ingredient by weight in bread or something haha

Issue has been changed to not focus on sugar content but rather the marketing and packaging, to differentiate its content from the issue mentioned above.


Make that change of direction evident from the opening premise, I think.
editors like linguistic ambiguity more than most people

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Mon Jan 06, 2020 3:47 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:
Lelscrep wrote:Following recent legislation, sugar is now the most prominent ingredient by weight in bread or something haha

Issue has been changed to not focus on sugar content but rather the marketing and packaging, to differentiate its content from the issue mentioned above.


Make that change of direction evident from the opening premise, I think.

Issue description has been altered to allude more to the packaging angle, thanks for the advice. Anything else that could further improve this issue? I'm working on a title change as sugar is no longer the focus.

User avatar
Candlewhisper Archive
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 22361
Founded: Aug 28, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Candlewhisper Archive » Mon Jan 06, 2020 4:02 am

Let's focus in on the opening, then:

Description - A peculiar mob of angry mothers, bored children, businessmen, hippies, and mobility scooter commanders has gathered around your offices following recent studies showing a staggering increase in childhood obesity and type two diabetes. Many are blaming the focused marketing towards children as the root cause of the issue, and wish to see it eradicated. Rational discourse ensues.


There's too much redundant framing here. I suggest trimming it down to the core, something like:

Childhood obesity is on the rise, with many blaming the tendency to put sugary foods in child-targeted packaging.


Longer openings are fine, of course, but should only be used if that additional length is carrying a story or humour, rather than just a description of "this is an issue, this is an issue, here's the issue, and this is an issue."

From there I'd suggest having the first speaker lay out the meat of the complaint, rather than just restating the dilemma, by giving some examples of how this happens, while maintaining in-character tone?
"What am I supposed to do when my five-year-old's favourite cartoon characters are gazing down from the shelf of Sugar-Pops (TM) cereals?"

After that, your next four options are meandering a bit. I'd suggest one reasonable corporate option, saying that parents control spending, not children, and they should be allowed to advertise and market their products without government interference. Then, one unreasonable crazy option of your choice. Banning capitalism is a bit boring by now, so maybe something like anti-smoking style government health warning stickers?
editors like linguistic ambiguity more than most people

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Mon Jan 06, 2020 4:49 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Let's focus in on the opening, then:

Description - A peculiar mob of angry mothers, bored children, businessmen, hippies, and mobility scooter commanders has gathered around your offices following recent studies showing a staggering increase in childhood obesity and type two diabetes. Many are blaming the focused marketing towards children as the root cause of the issue, and wish to see it eradicated. Rational discourse ensues.


There's too much redundant framing here. I suggest trimming it down to the core, something like:

Childhood obesity is on the rise, with many blaming the tendency to put sugary foods in child-targeted packaging.


Longer openings are fine, of course, but should only be used if that additional length is carrying a story or humour, rather than just a description of "this is an issue, this is an issue, here's the issue, and this is an issue."

From there I'd suggest having the first speaker lay out the meat of the complaint, rather than just restating the dilemma, by giving some examples of how this happens, while maintaining in-character tone?
"What am I supposed to do when my five-year-old's favourite cartoon characters are gazing down from the shelf of Sugar-Pops (TM) cereals?"

After that, your next four options are meandering a bit. I'd suggest one reasonable corporate option, saying that parents control spending, not children, and they should be allowed to advertise and market their products without government interference. Then, one unreasonable crazy option of your choice. Banning capitalism is a bit boring by now, so maybe something like anti-smoking style government health warning stickers?

Edited with a title change!

The description has been shortened to get to the point faster. I also took your anti-smoking style stickers idea to replace the hippie's original idea. As it turns out, the hippie has also been removed entirely and replaced with a nicotine addict, giving her reason to come up with the idea, even if stickers of the sort have not yet been implemented on cigarettes in said nation. Option three has been shortened and made more the neutral option (no more drugs in children's candy). I've kept the fifth option as the ridiculous one.

I'm still torn on the fourth option. For one I have re-written it to be shorter and a bit less, erm... Plain insulting to fat people. I think it fits here as the other "extreme" solution as opposed to option one, but I wouldn't be surprised if the consensus is that it's unnecessary.

Thank you greatly for your advice, it seriously is much appreciated. :)
Last edited by Lelscrep on Mon Jan 06, 2020 7:58 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:29 am

I've edited the issue further:

-Option Four has been further changed to be less needlessly insulting.
-Option Two has been changed to make it more clear she's a smoker.
-Validity requirements have been added to Option Two, realizing that if smoking was banned she would be confessing she's a criminal to the nation's leader.
-Effect lines have been altered.

Is there any further way this can be improved?

User avatar
Candlewhisper Archive
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 22361
Founded: Aug 28, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Candlewhisper Archive » Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:40 am

Five options is still too many. Lose 1-2 options, I suggest.
editors like linguistic ambiguity more than most people

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:52 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Five options is still too many. Lose 1-2 options, I suggest.

Thank you for your suggestion, I really do appreciate the help.

-Original Option Two has been dropped as upon consideration it just seemed like Option One but slightly less so. I liked the effect line of the option however, so I've moved that to Option One.
-Original Option Five was an obvious drop, it's a huge stretch for an issue of marketing to turn a nation autocratic. I also don't think any leader would make a decision like that based on the words of a tired, bored child.
-Another reason for removing both of these is they were affected by further validity checks, outside of Capitalism.

Thank you again for you help, is there anything else further that could be done?

User avatar
Candlewhisper Archive
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 22361
Founded: Aug 28, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Candlewhisper Archive » Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:19 am

[quote]Increase healthcare spending to ensure the safety of all citizens!"/quote]

This line here is a bit too vague, and is a bit of a non-sequitur coming from an overweight citizen telling the government to butt out.

Also, the option here is confusing the main issue, which is about sugary foods being marketed at CHILDREN, not fat adults eating sweet things.

I suggest ditching this option, and splitting option 1 into the two options it was before.
editors like linguistic ambiguity more than most people

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:45 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:
Increase healthcare spending to ensure the safety of all citizens!"/quote]

This line here is a bit too vague, and is a bit of a non-sequitur coming from an overweight citizen telling the government to butt out.

Also, the option here is confusing the main issue, which is about sugary foods being marketed at CHILDREN, not fat adults eating sweet things.

I suggest ditching this option, and splitting option 1 into the two options it was before.

I recognized the hypocrisy with the healthcare option, and attempted to make it sound like a man advocating for himself alone. I didn't really think of your second line, which could be why it felt out of place to me.

I've brought back the original Option Two, and changed the character once again, as I don't want nations with bans on smoking or drugs to be left with only two options. The effect lines have once again been changed to fit this new draft.

I keep saying this and you can stop responding if it's a bother, but seriously thank you for the suggestions. Is there anything I can do to better this issue more?

User avatar
Candlewhisper Archive
Senior Issues Editor
 
Posts: 22361
Founded: Aug 28, 2015
Anarchy

Postby Candlewhisper Archive » Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:52 am

Nothing dealbreaking.

comprise --> Compromise, and maybe move the speaker to the middle of the option rather than opening with them and then re-interrupting speech.
editors like linguistic ambiguity more than most people

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Tue Jan 07, 2020 6:10 am

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Nothing dealbreaking.

comprise --> Compromise, and maybe move the speaker to the middle of the option rather than opening with them and then re-interrupting speech.

Edits have been made. The Minister of Compromise option was also moved to Option Three, as to me it makes more sense for that suggestion to be made after hearing both sides of the argument.

Thanks heaps again. :)

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Wed Jan 08, 2020 6:50 am

Does anyone have any further suggestions? I'm fairly happy with this as is right now, however I'm going to keep drafting it for a week or three, so any help would be much appreciated!

User avatar
Sacara
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1755
Founded: May 13, 2014
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Sacara » Wed Jan 08, 2020 10:19 am

Couple things I think you should note:

First, effect lines are not sentences, so the first letter should not be capitalized and it should not end in a period. If you look on a nation's front page, they will be shown as a part of a series.

Second, you have a few grammar miscues here and there.
"... brazenly endorsing these products!?", screams an angry mother, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.


After the word "you", which I boldened to help it stand out, it should be a period and not a comma. You do that on all of your options so be sure to fix that. I also would recommend getting rid of the "!?" and just choosing one of them. Also, remove the unneeded comma immediately after that. In addition, the first letter of a word after ellipses is not capitalized if it is apart of the same sentence, which in this case it looks like it is.

Finally, I feel like all of the options are just missing something. I bet you could add more substance to option one, which right now is mainly just describing the speaker's actions. Go more into depth on why such packaging would be targeting children and not other age groups. For the second option, I'm not buying the 'black market demand for brighter packaging. Instead, I'd recommend something along the lines of "it's not my fault children seem to be drawn to race cars, you're thinking too deep about our packaging". You should make it known that the speaker knows what he is doing is wrong but is acting like it isn't. The final option seems pretty bland, too. It seems like a too 'normal' of an option. I don't have an idea right now for an 'out there' type third option, but I'm sure we could think of one.

I do like the short, succinct description you have. I'm not a fan of reading long paragraphs when I get issues so I'm always biased towards smaller, compact intros. All in all, this is a well-written issue, but I think it could be improved.
Last edited by Sacara on Wed Jan 08, 2020 10:20 am, edited 2 times in total.
The Spacefaring Federation of Sacara,
I tend to hang out in Got Issues? a lot, with the occasional NSG comment.
Issues That I've Authored (13)

"The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you" - Neil deGrasse Tyson

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Wed Jan 08, 2020 5:09 pm

Sacara wrote:Couple things I think you should note:

First, effect lines are not sentences, so the first letter should not be capitalized and it should not end in a period. If you look on a nation's front page, they will be shown as a part of a series.

Second, you have a few grammar miscues here and there.
"... brazenly endorsing these products!?", screams an angry mother, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.


After the word "you", which I boldened to help it stand out, it should be a period and not a comma. You do that on all of your options so be sure to fix that. I also would recommend getting rid of the "!?" and just choosing one of them. Also, remove the unneeded comma immediately after that. In addition, the first letter of a word after ellipses is not capitalized if it is apart of the same sentence, which in this case it looks like it is.

Finally, I feel like all of the options are just missing something. I bet you could add more substance to option one, which right now is mainly just describing the speaker's actions. Go more into depth on why such packaging would be targeting children and not other age groups. For the second option, I'm not buying the 'black market demand for brighter packaging. Instead, I'd recommend something along the lines of "it's not my fault children seem to be drawn to race cars, you're thinking too deep about our packaging". You should make it known that the speaker knows what he is doing is wrong but is acting like it isn't. The final option seems pretty bland, too. It seems like a too 'normal' of an option. I don't have an idea right now for an 'out there' type third option, but I'm sure we could think of one.

I do like the short, succinct description you have. I'm not a fan of reading long paragraphs when I get issues so I'm always biased towards smaller, compact intros. All in all, this is a well-written issue, but I think it could be improved.


There are two alternate options that don't exist anymore in my previous draft, if that interests you. I'll keep in mind the effect line punctuation too. The "black market" demand thing was supposed to be the speaker coming up with an excuse for what he's doing, but it seems to have come off as ignorance, so I'll alter it. I'll look into livening up the options, thank you.

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Wed Jan 08, 2020 6:06 pm

Edits have meed made to the first two options, to further justify their arguments. Option three has also been changed to be more out there - now a literal 50/50 compromise between the two previous options.

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Fri Jan 31, 2020 10:57 pm

Bumping this for any further feedback before I submit.

User avatar
Authoritaria-Imperia
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 435
Founded: Nov 06, 2019
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Authoritaria-Imperia » Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:08 am

Lelscrep wrote:
Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How are we supposed to keep our children healthy when all of their favorite cartoon characters are shown brazenly endorsing these products?" screams an angry mother, holding a sign saying "Eyepop ate spinach, not Jupiter Bars!". "Our children - who can't tell reality from fiction yet - are tricked into thinking they need these products to be like their heroes! We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!"

Effect - cereal isles resemble a Piet Mondrian work

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@. "You people are all over-analyzing this - they're just some silly cartoon characters on some candy packaging, no harm to anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to purchase from us- uh, I mean purchase responsibly."

Effect - candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights

Option Three - "I mean, that loud mother definitely has a point, but I think she needs to calm down. How about yelling instead of screaming?" your Minister of Compromise butts in, combing half of his hair back. "How about we make it so half of all packaging has to be plain and informative, and the other can have whatever the business wants to put on it? Split directly down the middle! Both sides get literally half of what they want! Isn't that sweet?"

Effect - children are taught to read fine-print while learning about addition
Draft 7

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How are we supposed to keep our children healthy when all of their favorite cartoon characters are shown brazenly endorsing these products!?", screams an angry mother, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Cereal isles resemble a Piet Mondrian work.

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.

Option Three - "I mean, that loud mother definitely has a point, but I think she needs to calm down. How about yelling instead of screaming?" your Minister of Compromise butts in, combing half of his hair back, "The solution is simple: small, informative stickers on all these products so everyone knows what's up with them; they don't even have to change what's on the packaging. Doesn't that sound sweet?"

Effect - Children are taught to read fine-print while learning about addition.
Draft 6

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How am I supposed to manage my little Timothy's health when all of this packaging portrays the cartoon characters our children are obsessed with!?", screams an angry mother, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Cereal isles resemble a Piet Mondrian work.

Option Two - Your Minister of comprise butts in, "I mean, that loud mother definitely has a point, but I think they need to calm down. How about yelling instead of screaming?" he says, combing half of his hair back, "The solution is simple: small, informative stickers on all these products so everyone knows what's up with them; they don't even have to change what's on the packaging. Doesn't that sound sweet?"

Effect - Children are taught to read fine-print while learning about addition.

Option Three - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.
Draft 5

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How am I supposed to manage my little Timothy's health when all of this packaging portrays the cartoon characters our children are obsessed with!?", yells one of the angry mothers, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Candy stores are indistinguishable from a tobacconist.

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.

Option Three - "The government should stay outta my dietary decisions!" wails a generously proportioned man from within the crowd, catching his breath, "If anything, you should be supporting the decisions of people like me, @@LEADER@@! Increase healthcare spending to ensure the safety of all citizens!"

Effect - Diabetes is considered a natural part of aging.
Draft 4

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How am I supposed to manage my little Timothy's health when all of this packaging portrays the cartoon characters our children are obsessed with!?", yells one of the angry mothers, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Supermarkets are now lined with single colored boxes of candy.

Option Two - An irritable looking woman smelling of smoke emerges from within the crowd. "I mean, these loud mothers definitely have a point man, but like, they need to chill out." she says, staring blankly at you before abruptly continuing again, "The solution is anti-sugar stickers on all these products so everyone knows what's up with them, kinda like what some places are doing to our cigarettes, you know?"

Validity - Nation must not have No Smoking, or No Drugs policy to receive this option.

Effect - The tobacconist and the candy store are indistinguishable.

Option Tree - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.

Option Four - "The government should stay outta my dietary decisions!" wails a generously proportioned man from within the crowd, catching his breath, "If anything, you should be supporting the decisions of people like me, @@LEADER@@! Increase healthcare spending to ensure the safety of all citizens!"

Effect - Diabetes is considered a natural part of aging.

Option Five - Just when you think you've heard every voice, you feel a tug on your trousers, only to discover little Timothy. "My mommy said I would come along to help you make the right decision about my Jupiter Bars," he started, mumbling over his words, "Well why do you need to have other people tell you what to do? Why don't you make all the decisions yourself, mister?" he finished before grabbing a Jupiter Bar that had landed at your feet, and promptly returning to his mommy.

Validity - Nation must not already have the Autocracy policy to receive this option.

Effect - Sugary treats are now at the mercy of your very whim.

Hey, this is good! :) But you may want to add an obesity validity — in nations with hardly any obesity, this may be a strange issue to receive. Then again, obesity doesn't have to be high to be "on the rise"… so maybe such a validity thing isn't necessary.

Also — since the first two options are really contradictory (hurt retail and lower obesity vs. more retail and obesity), a compromise option seems like it wouldn't do much. My suggestion is to have the speaker say something about how "people should learn to accept and love each other" or something, to create increases in Inclusiveness and Niceness. That thematically fits the compromise solution and gives the option a clear outcome.

Good luck! :)
Last edited by Authoritaria-Imperia on Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:11 am, edited 4 times in total.
Thanks to all the first responders working to fight off this pandemic! Folks, you can make a donation here.

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Sat Feb 01, 2020 4:38 am

Authoritaria-Imperia wrote:
Lelscrep wrote:
Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How are we supposed to keep our children healthy when all of their favorite cartoon characters are shown brazenly endorsing these products?" screams an angry mother, holding a sign saying "Eyepop ate spinach, not Jupiter Bars!". "Our children - who can't tell reality from fiction yet - are tricked into thinking they need these products to be like their heroes! We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!"

Effect - cereal isles resemble a Piet Mondrian work

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@. "You people are all over-analyzing this - they're just some silly cartoon characters on some candy packaging, no harm to anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to purchase from us- uh, I mean purchase responsibly."

Effect - candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights

Option Three - "I mean, that loud mother definitely has a point, but I think she needs to calm down. How about yelling instead of screaming?" your Minister of Compromise butts in, combing half of his hair back. "How about we make it so half of all packaging has to be plain and informative, and the other can have whatever the business wants to put on it? Split directly down the middle! Both sides get literally half of what they want! Isn't that sweet?"

Effect - children are taught to read fine-print while learning about addition
Draft 7

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How are we supposed to keep our children healthy when all of their favorite cartoon characters are shown brazenly endorsing these products!?", screams an angry mother, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Cereal isles resemble a Piet Mondrian work.

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.

Option Three - "I mean, that loud mother definitely has a point, but I think she needs to calm down. How about yelling instead of screaming?" your Minister of Compromise butts in, combing half of his hair back, "The solution is simple: small, informative stickers on all these products so everyone knows what's up with them; they don't even have to change what's on the packaging. Doesn't that sound sweet?"

Effect - Children are taught to read fine-print while learning about addition.
Draft 6

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How am I supposed to manage my little Timothy's health when all of this packaging portrays the cartoon characters our children are obsessed with!?", screams an angry mother, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Cereal isles resemble a Piet Mondrian work.

Option Two - Your Minister of comprise butts in, "I mean, that loud mother definitely has a point, but I think they need to calm down. How about yelling instead of screaming?" he says, combing half of his hair back, "The solution is simple: small, informative stickers on all these products so everyone knows what's up with them; they don't even have to change what's on the packaging. Doesn't that sound sweet?"

Effect - Children are taught to read fine-print while learning about addition.

Option Three - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.
Draft 5

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How am I supposed to manage my little Timothy's health when all of this packaging portrays the cartoon characters our children are obsessed with!?", yells one of the angry mothers, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children! Plain, informative packaging!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Candy stores are indistinguishable from a tobacconist.

Option Two - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.

Option Three - "The government should stay outta my dietary decisions!" wails a generously proportioned man from within the crowd, catching his breath, "If anything, you should be supporting the decisions of people like me, @@LEADER@@! Increase healthcare spending to ensure the safety of all citizens!"

Effect - Diabetes is considered a natural part of aging.
Draft 4

Title - Sweet, Sweet Marketing

Validity - Nation must have the Capitalism policy.

Description - With recent studies showing childhood obesity is on the rise, many believe this to be the fault of child attention-grabbing packaging.

Option One - "How am I supposed to manage my little Timothy's health when all of this packaging portrays the cartoon characters our children are obsessed with!?", yells one of the angry mothers, who unfortunately happens to be standing directly in front of you, "We mothers demand a ban on packaging made to influence the minds of children!" she finishes, throwing multiple Jupiter Bars in your face.

Effect - Supermarkets are now lined with single colored boxes of candy.

Option Two - An irritable looking woman smelling of smoke emerges from within the crowd. "I mean, these loud mothers definitely have a point man, but like, they need to chill out." she says, staring blankly at you before abruptly continuing again, "The solution is anti-sugar stickers on all these products so everyone knows what's up with them, kinda like what some places are doing to our cigarettes, you know?"

Validity - Nation must not have No Smoking, or No Drugs policy to receive this option.

Effect - The tobacconist and the candy store are indistinguishable.

Option Tree - "Come now, surely the people of @@NAME@@ can be trusted to make their own decisions?" purrs fat-cat CEO of Jupiter Candies @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, "These bans will create a black-market demand for uh... Brighter packaging... Which is no good for anyone! Allow business to continue as usual, and entrust the people of @@NAME@@ to make informed dietary decisions."

Effect - Candy packages are regularly equipped with speakers and flashing lights.

Option Four - "The government should stay outta my dietary decisions!" wails a generously proportioned man from within the crowd, catching his breath, "If anything, you should be supporting the decisions of people like me, @@LEADER@@! Increase healthcare spending to ensure the safety of all citizens!"

Effect - Diabetes is considered a natural part of aging.

Option Five - Just when you think you've heard every voice, you feel a tug on your trousers, only to discover little Timothy. "My mommy said I would come along to help you make the right decision about my Jupiter Bars," he started, mumbling over his words, "Well why do you need to have other people tell you what to do? Why don't you make all the decisions yourself, mister?" he finished before grabbing a Jupiter Bar that had landed at your feet, and promptly returning to his mommy.

Validity - Nation must not already have the Autocracy policy to receive this option.

Effect - Sugary treats are now at the mercy of your very whim.

Hey, this is good! :) But you may want to add an obesity validity — in nations with hardly any obesity, this may be a strange issue to receive. Then again, obesity doesn't have to be high to be "on the rise"… so maybe such a validity thing isn't necessary.

Also — since the first two options are really contradictory (hurt retail and lower obesity vs. more retail and obesity), a compromise option seems like it wouldn't do much. My suggestion is to have the speaker say something about how "people should learn to accept and love each other" or something, to create increases in Inclusiveness and Niceness. That thematically fits the compromise solution and gives the option a clear outcome.

Good luck! :)

Thank you for the suggestion! I will draft this out privately until I am happy with what I get. Does anyone else have anything to add?

User avatar
Lelscrep
Envoy
 
Posts: 234
Founded: Apr 11, 2015
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Lelscrep » Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:29 am

Will be submitting reasonably soon, if anyone has any feedback at all, now is the time to let me know. Thank you to everyone who helped out!

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Got Issues?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads